Advertisement

11C-Choline PET/CT in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with docetaxel

  • Francesco Ceci
  • Paolo Castellucci
  • Tiziano Graziani
  • Riccardo Schiavina
  • Riccardo Renzi
  • Marco Borghesi
  • Piergiorgio Di Tullio
  • Eugenio Brunocilla
  • Andrea Ardizzoni
  • Stefano Fanti
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the role of 11C-choline PET/CT for evaluating the response to treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with docetaxel in comparison with PSA response.

Methods

Inclusion criteria were (a) proven mCRPC, (b) docetaxel as first line of chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m2 + prednisone 5 mg), and (c) 11C-choline PET/CT and PSA values assessed before and after docetaxel administration. A total of 61 patients were retrospectively enrolled (mean age 68.9 years, range 57 – 84 years). 11C-Choline PET/CT was performed at baseline before docetaxel treatment (PET1) and after the end of treatment (PET2). PSA values were measured before treatment (PSA1) and after treatment (PSA2). PET2 was reported as complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD). Progressive disease (PD) was considered if a new lesion was seen. PSA trend was calculated from the change in absolute values between PSA1 and PSA2. A decrease of ≥50 % between PSA1 and PSA2 was considered a PSA response. Clinical, radiological and laboratory follow-up ranged from 6 to 53 months (mean 13.5 months).

Results

Of the 61 patients, 40 (65.5 %) showed PD on PET2, 13 (21.3 %) showed SD, 2 (3.4 %) showed PR, and 6 (9.8 %) showed CR. An increasing PSA trend was seen in 29 patients (47.5 %) and a decreasing PSA trend in 32 patients (52.5 %). A PSA response of ≥50 % was seen in 25 patients (41 %). Radiological PD was seen in 23 of the 29 patients (79.3 %) with an increasing PSA trend, in 16 of the 32 patients (50 %) with a decreasing PSA trend, and in 11 of the 25 patients (44 %) with a PSA response of ≥50 %. In the multivariate statistical analysis, the presence of more than ten bone lesions detected on PET1 was significantly associated with an increased probability of PD on PET2. No association was observed between PSA level and PD on PET2.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that an increasing PSA trend measured after docetaxel treatment could be considered predictive of PD. In patients with decreasing PSA values (decreasing PSA trend and a PSA response of ≥50 %), 11C-choline PET/CT may be useful to identify those with radiological progression despite a PSA response. Finally, the tumour burden, expressed as number of bone lesions on PET1, is significantly associated with an increased probability of PD on PET2.

Keywords

CRPC Biochemical relapse Docetaxel Chemotherapy prostate cancer Therapy response 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None.

Ethical approval

This study was performed according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all patients before the start of the study according to institutional guidelines.

References

  1. 1.
    Ferlay J, Steliarova-Foucher E, Lortet-Tieulent J, Rosso S, Coebergh JW, Comber H, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:1374–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sridhar SS, Freedland SJ, Gleave ME, Higano C, Mulders P, Parker C, et al. Castration-resistant prostate cancer: from new pathophysiology to new treatment. Eur Urol. 2014;65:289–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Loblaw DA, Walker-Dilks C, Winquist E, Hotte SJ. Systemic therapy in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2013;25:406–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Briers E, van den Bergh RCN, Bolla M, van Casteren NJ, et al. Guidelines on prostate cancer. European Association of Urology; 2015.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mohler JL, Kantoff PW, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, Cohen M, D’Amico AV, et al. Prostate cancer, version 2.2014. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014;12(5):686–718.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bubley GJ, Carducci M, Dahut W, Dawson N, Daliani D, Eisenberger M, et al. Eligibility and response guidelines for phase II clinical trials in androgen-independent prostate cancer: recommendations from the PSA Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:3461–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mulders PF, Schalken JA. Measuring therapeutic efficacy in the changing paradigm of castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2009;12:241–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ryan CJ, Shah S, Efstathiou E, Smith MR, Taplin ME, Bubley GJ, et al. Phase II study of abiraterone acetate in chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer displaying bone flare discordant with serologic response. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:4854–61.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Armstrong AJ, Garrett-Mayer E, de Wit R, Tannock I, Eisenberger M. Prediction of survival following first-line chemotherapy in men with castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(1):203–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Castellucci P, Fuccio C, Nanni C, Santi I, Rizzello A, Lodi F, et al. Influence of trigger PSA and PSA kinetics on 11C-choline PET/CT detection rate in patients with biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1394–400.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krause BJ, Souvatzoglou M, Tuncel M, Herrmann K, Buck AK, Praus C, et al. The detection rate of [11C]choline-PET/CT depends on the serum PSA-value in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(1):18–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castellucci P, Fuccio C, Rubello D, Schiavina R, Santi I, Nanni C, et al. Is there a role for 11C-choline PET/CT in the early detection of metastatic disease in surgically treated prostate cancer patients with a mild PSA increase <1.5 ng/ml? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(1):55–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mamede M, Ceci F, Castellucci P, Schiavina R, Fuccio C, Nanni C, et al. The role of 11C-choline PET imaging in the early detection of recurrence in surgically treated prostate cancer patients with very low PSA level <0.5 ng/mL. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38(9):e342–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ceci F, Castellucci P, Mamede M, Schiavina R, Rubello D, Fuccio C, et al. (11)C-Choline PET/CT in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer showing biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(2):149–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2000;284:3043–5.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pascali C, Bogni A, Iwata R. 11C-methylation on 18C SepPak cartridge: a convenient way to produce [N-methyl-11C]choline. J Labelled Comp Radiopharm. 2000;49:195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, Herholz K, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma AA, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35(13):1773–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Khan MA, Carter HB, Epstein JI, Miller MC, Landis P, Walsh PW, et al. Can prostate specific antigen derivatives and pathological parameters predict significant change in expectant management criteria for prostate cancer? J Urol. 2003;170(6 Pt 1):2274–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Castellucci P, Ceci F, Graziani T, Schiavina R, Brunocilla E, Mazzarotto R, et al. Early biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy: which prostate cancer patients may benefit from a restaging 11C-choline PET/CT scan before salvage radiation therapy? J Nucl Med. 2014;55(9):1424–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Picchio M, Berardi G, Fodor A, Busnardo E, Crivellaro C, Giovacchini G, et al. (11)C-Choline PET/CT as a guide to radiation treatment planning of lymph-node relapses in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(7):1270–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Gallina A, Di Trapani E, Scattoni V, Vizziello D, et al. Long-term outcomes of salvage lymph node dissection for clinically recurrent prostate cancer: results of a single-institution series with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Eur Urol. 2015;67(2):299–309.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ceci F, Herrmann K, Castellucci P, Graziani T, Bluemel C, Schiavina R, et al. Impact of 11C-choline PET/CT on clinical decision making in recurrent prostate cancer: results from a retrospective two-centre trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(12):2222–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Soyka JD, Muster MA, Schmid DT, Seifert B, Schick U, Miralbell R, et al. Clinical impact of 18F-choline PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39(6):936–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Giovacchini G, Incerti E, Mapelli P, Kirienko M, Briganti A, Gandaglia G, et al. [11C]Choline PET/CT predicts survival in hormone-naive prostate cancer patients with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(6):877–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Garcia-Parra R, Briganti A, Abdollah F, Gianolli L, et al. 11C-choline PET/CT predicts prostate cancer-specific survival in patients with biochemical failure during androgen-deprivation therapy. J Nucl Med. 2014;55(2):233–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fitzpatrick JM, Bellmunt J, Fizazi K, Heidenreich A, Sternberg CN, Tombal B, et al. Optimal management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: highlights from a European Expert Consensus Panel. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(9):1617–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    De Giorgi U, Caroli P, Burgio SL, Menna C, Conteduca V, Bianchi E, et al. Early outcome prediction on 18F-fluorocholine PET/CT in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with abiraterone. Oncotarget. 2014;5(23):12448–58.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    De Giorgi U, Caroli P, Scarpi E, Conteduca V, Burgio SL, Menna C, et al. (18)F-Fluorocholine PET/CT for early response assessment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with enzalutamide. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1276–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kwee SA, Lim J, Watanabe A, Kromer-Baker K, Coel MN. Prognosis related to metastatic burden measured by 18F-fluorocholine PET/CT in castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2014;55(6):905–10.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL, Holland-Letz T, Linhart HG, Eder M, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:197–209.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B, et al. Evaluation of hybrid 68Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(5):668–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ceci F, Uprimny C, Nilica B, Geraldo L, Kendler D, Kroiss A, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT for restaging recurrent prostate cancer: which factors are associated with PET/CT detection rate? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1284–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesco Ceci
    • 1
    • 4
  • Paolo Castellucci
    • 1
  • Tiziano Graziani
    • 1
  • Riccardo Schiavina
    • 2
  • Riccardo Renzi
    • 1
  • Marco Borghesi
    • 2
  • Piergiorgio Di Tullio
    • 3
  • Eugenio Brunocilla
    • 2
  • Andrea Ardizzoni
    • 3
  • Stefano Fanti
    • 1
  1. 1.Service of Nuclear Medicine, S.Orsola-Malpighi HospitalUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Urology, S.Orsola-Malpighi HospitalUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Oncology, S.Orsola-Malpighi HospitalUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  4. 4.UO Medicina Nucleare PAD. 30Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Policlinico S.Orsola-MalpighiBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations